Margaret Reaves v. Ocwen Loan Servicing LLC, No. 16-2017 (4th Cir. 2017)

Annotate this Case

The court issued a subsequent related opinion or order on June 12, 2017.

Download PDF

UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 16-2017 MARGARET REAVES, Plaintiff – Appellant, v. OCWEN LOAN SERVICING LLC; LITTON LOAN SERVICING; POPULAR FINANCIAL; THE BANK OF NEW YORK MELLON, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina, at Raleigh. Louise W. Flanagan, District Judge. (5:16-cv-00186-FL) Submitted: February 16, 2017 Before GREGORY, Chief Judge, HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge. Decided: DUNCAN, February 21, 2017 Circuit Judge, and Dismissed and remanded by unpublished per curiam opinion. Margaret Reaves, Appellant Pro Se. Brian Michael Rowlson, BRADLEY ARANT BOULT CUMMINGS LLP, Charlotte, North Carolina, for Appellees. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. PER CURIAM: Margaret Reaves seeks to appeal the district court’s order dismissing her civil complaint. This court may exercise jurisdiction only over final orders, 28 U.S.C. § 1291 (2012), and certain interlocutory and collateral orders, 28 U.S.C. § 1292 (2012); Fed. R. Civ. P. 54(b); Cohen v. Beneficial Indus. Loan Corp., 337 U.S. 541, 545-47 (1949). Because the deficiencies identified by the district court may be remedied by the filing of an amended complaint, we conclude that the order Reaves seeks to appeal is neither a final appealable interlocutory or collateral order. order nor an Goode v. Cent. Va. Legal Aid Soc’y, Inc., 807 F.3d 619, 623 (4th Cir. 2015); Domino Sugar Corp. v. Sugar Workers Local Union 392, 10 F.3d 1064, 1066-67 (4th Cir. 1993). Accordingly, we dismiss the appeal for lack of jurisdiction and remand the case to the district court with instructions to allow Reaves to file an amended complaint. oral argument adequately because presented in the the facts and materials legal before We dispense with contentions this court are and argument would not aid the decisional process. DISMISSED AND REMANDED 2

Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.